Loading AI tools
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 | → | Archive 95 |
Per WP:LEDE, " The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents". Therefore various stas and other isolated piece of info do not belong to it. Therefore I removed the last paragraph.
Also I think the second paragraph with prehistory belongs to a separate "prehistory" section, and in the lede there must be a phrase telling something about prehistory. Besides, it is inadequately written. For exmple, the phrase "Inhabited since the Middle Bronze Age by Canaanite tribes,[23][24] Israel..." is an anachronism: there was no Israel in Bronze Age. Loew Galitz (talk) 21:53, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
)
“For most of the period between 1948 and the early 1970s, driving the Israelis into the sea in an act of genocide was the rhetorical goal of the “Arab” states, adding to Jewish apprehension from the Holocaust years.” Snow, D. M. (2021). The Middle East and American National Security: Forever Wars and Conflicts?. United States: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
“During the period from 1968 to 1973, the far left did express some discomfort with the frequent calls from Arabs for a jihad, or Muslim holy war, against Israel and the Jews, and the boasts of such Arab leaders as Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdel Nasser that the Arabs would drive the lews of Israel "into the sea," a euphemism for genocide, a second Holocaust for the Jewish people.” Norwood, S. H. (2013). Antisemitism and the American Far Left. United States: Cambridge University Press.
Drsmoo (talk) 16:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
@Daveout: I thought it was worth moving the nation-state note up into the first paragraph because Jewish identity is obviously so important/one could argue central for the country (an ethnolinguistic/cultural approach to national identity that many countries either lack or do not specifically emphasise), and otherwise this is not directly addressed until the third paragraph. For me it seemed like an odd omission to not mention anything about this in the first paragraph, as, for a first-time reader on the subject, this would likely be high priority and high interest information. Seems a little remiss otherwise. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Oof. (Walker Snarling) (talk) 17:20, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
I added a line to the 1948 paragraph on the Palestinian exodus as discussed up above. nableezy - 19:42, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
Of these, just under two-thirds lived in French- and Italian-controlled North Africa, 15–20% in the Kingdom of Iraq, approximately 10% in the Kingdom of Egypt and approximately 7% in the Kingdom of Yemen. A further 200,000 lived in Pahlavi Iran and the Republic of Turkey.The two thirds from North Africa had more to do with pull-factors than push -factors, as explained in the article. Onceinawhile (talk) 05:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Our Zionist policy must now pay special attention to the Jewish population groups in the Arab countries. If there are diasporas that it is our obligation to eliminate with the greatest possible urgency by bringing those Jews to the homeland, it is the Arab diasporas: Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and North Africa, as well as the Jews of Persia and Turkey. What European Jewry is now experiencing obliges us to be especially anxious about the fate of the diasporas in the Middle East. Those Jewish groups are the hostages of Zionism... Our first move with a view toward coming events is immigration. But the paths of immigration from Europe are desolate now. The [doors] are shut tight, and there are very few countries that have a land link to the Land of Israel – the neighboring countries. All these considerations are cause for anxiety and for special activity to move the Jews in the Arab countries to the land of Israel speedily. It is a mark of great failure by Zionism that we have not yet eliminated the Yemen exile [diaspora]. If we do not eliminate the Iraq exile by Zionist means, there is a danger that it will be eliminated by Hitlerite means.
Tombah, this method of "dont add unless there is consensus" when you dont like material and then reverting when you do is tendentious. What exactly is the objection to including the expulsion of the Palestinians to the lead? nableezy - 14:17, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
The efn says "The plan document, while noting the issue of Jewish refugees, stipulates that a "just solution for these Jewish refugees should be implemented through an appropriate international mechanism separate from the Israel-Palestinian Peace Agreement."
References
Selfstudier (talk) 18:52, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
"In the two decades that followed Israel's founding, some 800,000 Jews left the Arab World (300,000 in the very first few years)"is all fine. Maybe efn the rest. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:10, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
In the two decades that followed Israel's founding, some 800,000 Jews left the Arab World (300,000 in the very first few years), many as the result of hostilities and persecution.Alaexis¿question? 19:16, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Approximately 260,000 Jews from the Arab world moved to Israel during and immediately after the war.And we can also use this: Shindler, Colin (2013). A History of Modern Israel. Cambridge University Press. p. 64. ISBN 978-1-107-02862-3.
Over 37 per cent of Jews in Islamic countries – the Arab world, Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan – left for Israel between May 1948 and the beginning of 1952. This amounted to 56 per cent of the total immigration.Additionally, we should include Jewish emigration from Europe as it was likewise sizable: A page earlier in Shindler: By the beginning of 1952, nearly a third of all East European Jews had left for Israel. nableezy - 20:17, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Israel fought against the Arab world, not just Arab Palestinians, so mentioning exodus from one side to the other, but not vice versa, is expectedly raises questions. None of these migrations should be added because the lead is already too long. MOS:LEAD: "lead section should contain no more than four well-composed paragraphs". This article has five. Take a look at Featured and Good articles about other countries, such as Jordan, Azerbaijan, Germany, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand etc. Their lead sections are shorter both in size and in the number of paragraphs. Most of them have only one paragraph dedicated to history, while this one has two. The second and third paragraphs on history here should be shortened and merged to bring the lead to an appropriate size and structure in accordance with the guidelines and common practice. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 23:43, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
It would not make sense to specifically mention the Palestinian exodus without mentioning the Jewish exodus. Both began in 1948 (I'm not talking about earlier waves of Aliyah) due to the war, and both were a similar number of people being pushed out of or brought into Israel. Both had a significant consequence on the geopolitical situation in the Middle East and the demographics of Israel. It's crazy how some editors here jump straight to insulting me or others who suggest an edit, while I bet if I insulted them, they would call me a racist Zionist or something. Bill Williams 15:59, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
But there seems to be a pretty wide ranging agreement on including both in the lead. I am going to do that now, with the 260,000 number from the Fischbach source for the immediate aftermath of the war. Later waves of immigration may make sense to include, but not in the paragraph about 1948. nableezy - 16:30, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
As far as emigrated includes expelling and fleeing, yes thats true, but the inverse is not true as only including fleeing and expelled does not include anybody who voluntarily left, and as discussed above that is not an insignificant portion. So I dont understand how one can say that emigrated includes these two things, but then keep those two things but remove emigrated when that is the one that is not redundant. I see it is now left, but I also think that is understating things, as some certainly were expelled or fled (eg Iraq). I think the original wording of emigrated, fled or expelled is appropriate. But just leaving it as "fled or expelled" is not. nableezy - 13:19, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
The direction of the recent additions to the lede seems unbalanced. Per Aliyah#Historic data, the big post-statehood immigration stories are:
Focusing on just Muslim countries gives a false picture, and feels WP:POINTy.
Onceinawhile (talk) 18:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
An Aliyah sentence, which would be a good addition to the lede, should tell the story shown in this picture.
I think two sentences on population change since 1948 would make sense:
Onceinawhile (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
The paragraph on the conflict has consensus in the archives, and the meme about the Arab states invaded Israel is both inaccurate and non-neutral. What was Israel, which Arab state actually invaded, as opposed to entered Palestine, and so on. Either way, skewing away from what already has consensus is tendentious. nableezy - 13:44, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
The population is ranked 92 now. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population Fun71528 (talk) 21:58, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
@חוקרת: this edit is inappropriate. I am minded to report this behavior if it continues. Two issues:
Can we please stop wasting time on this. The matter was discussed in great detail a few years ago, and we landed on a reasonable and stable balanced picture at Jewish exodus from the Muslim world: The reasons for the exoduses are manifold, including pull factors, such as the desire to fulfill Zionist yearnings or find a better economic status and a secure home in Europe or the Americas and, in Israel, a policy change in favour of mass immigration focused on Jews from Arab and Muslim countries,[16] together with push factors, such as persecution / antisemitism, political instability,[17] poverty[17] and expulsion. The history of the exodus has been politicized, given its proposed relevance to the historical narrative of the Arab–Israeli conflict.[18][19] When presenting the history, those who view the Jewish exodus as analogous to the 1948 Palestinian exodus generally emphasize the push factors and consider those who left as refugees, while those who do not, emphasize the pull factors and consider them willing immigrants.[20]
All reliable sources are agreed on this complex and varied picture, and presenting it an unbalanced fashion is unacceptable.
Onceinawhile (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Daveout
(talk) 12:57, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
References
I certainly do not think it is necessary to put the law of return in the paragraph. It's too much information and a pointlessly long pause, do you agree with me? Fun71528 (talk) 16:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
? Fun71528 (talk) 07:01, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Don’t you think?? Fun71528 (talk) 14:48, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
The reference to the law of returns is not necessary in a paragraph that is too long, it should be deleted and moved to the text itself. The lead is very long and there is no place for this law. Fun71528 (talk) 07:27, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
the lead is very, very long, the paragraph on the law of return should be removed. Fun71528 (talk) 07:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
The image that shows the geography and borders of the country is redundant in the table. After all, there is already a map of the country from the maps of the world, why add to it? Do you think the image should be removed? Fun71528 (talk) 11:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
You can see that I opened a discussion several times on the page regarding the Law of Return and did not receive an answer Fun71528 (talk) 12:54, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
I didn't get an answer, the edit that added information was not good because the article is too long. Do you agree with my statement about the second picture? Fun71528 (talk) 13:19, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Do you believe the second picture should be removed? There are already so many geographic pictures in the article. Fun71528 (talk) 08:29, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Israel declares Jerusalem to be its capital, just like any other nation state sets their capital Israel's seat of government is in Jerusalem
Apart from its being extremely ugly English, the bolded part is clearly both unnecessary and pointy, indeed contrafactual, since it asserts 'normalcy' 'conformity to international practice, whereas the situation there has been historically anomalous. That should be removed. I'd do it myself, but I can't see how to. Nishidani (talk) 11:39, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
(a)Israel declares Jerusalem to be its capital, just like any other nation state sets their capital (b) Israel's seat of government is in Jerusalem.
the land held by present-day Israel was once the setting for much of Biblical history, beginning with the 9th-century Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah,[1][2]
'the land held by present-day Israel' is a euphemism that glosses over the distinction between Israel and the territory it occupies. Israel has its official land, which is largely non-biblical, and occupies the Biblical coreland of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Where in those texts is this statement made by the respective authors? At a minimum, the source and pagination, with a citation of the text supporting such a statement, is required, otherwise it should be removed. Nishidani (talk) 11:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
(a)"By the end of the twentieth century, archaeology had shown that there were simply too many material correspondences between the finds in Israel and in the entire Near East and the world described in the Bible to suggest that the Bible was late and fanciful priestly literature, written with no historical basis at all. But at the same time there were too many any contradictions between archaeological finds and the biblical narratives to suggest that the Bible provided a precise description of what actually occurred."
(b)the land held by present-day Israel was once the setting for much of Biblical history, beginning with the 9th-century Iron Age kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.